Jump to content

CaptainAhab

IPMS/USA Member
  • Posts

    168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Posts posted by CaptainAhab

  1. 9 hours ago, Ralph Nardone said:

    …When I first joined IPMS/USA in the mid-1980's, there was a certain arrogant air about the way some members saw the hobby and believed that everyone should think that way or take a hike.  Even now, there is a faction of the IPMS/USA membership that needs to get over itself and realize that a plastic model is a plastic model, and we should welcome all modelers, regardless of interest, desire, or ability….

    …..They have no interest in adding minute details to the pilot's relief tube or researching the exact shade of a particular color of paint applied to a particular subject 80 years ago, and they'd rather not spend their leisure time compressing their turds into diamonds simply to please a group of people with flashlights.  It is a pastime, something they do to feed a need to do something with their hands.  They don't view it as art, it is simply a thing they do……

    ….If all you want are "serious" modelers, the membership numbers will invariably shrink, and before too long it will become an echo chamber...

    R

    Ralph, please don’t confuse arrogance with seriousness, there are arrogant people in all aspects of life and always will be. They can tell you to take a hike, but they have no power over you to make you take a hike, and in my experience, both at the chapter level and national, those members are in the minority, as they are in life. We do welcome all modelers, I agree with Gil, we should not hide or run away from our roots about plastic models, we took out the requirement at the national contest that models had to be “all or mostly” plastic, and I’ve never seen a chapter that excluded anyone because of their preference.
     

    I think IPMS does welcome all categories of modelers, no matter how you like to build. I like to scratch build, I enjoy it, all of it, from research to building to finishing, it’s my relaxation/therapy/pastime, even if I’m not as good at it as others, I don’t disparage those who don’t any more than those who do more or better then I do. I wouldn’t say someone who builds all wooden ship models from scratch, bending and shaping the hull planks with steam, and making/sewing sails out of cloth does it to please people with flashlights, but I would call them serious about what they do, AND, if that person or any other takes it to a contest, it will need to be rated and differencated from the other models.

    I take being a serious modeler as anyone with more then 2-3 unbuilt models, or more then a shoe box of paints/modeling tools, in my experience those that actively and/or want to build, even if they don’t finish many, are serious modelers. But, I don’t think IPMS should change its philosophy just to get members.

    • Like 1
  2. 19 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    I suggested many years ago that IPMS should be renamed ISMS (International Scale Modellers Society) to reflect that we should embrace all serious static scale modellers no matter what material the models are made from.  As expected, my suggestion went down like a lead balloon with the die hards of IPMS.

    IPMS magazines going digital? Not sure on this one. For example if the digital version was not set up so that each article could be downloaded separately I can't see the point. Apart from saving the society a lot of money and a presumption that everyone has internet access that is. And believe it or not there are many of us who still like a printed magazine. OK, there is an argument that it cannot ever remain bang up to date because of the internet, but it is the same for commercial model making magazines too.

    I don’t completely disagree with the name issue, I find that the vast majority of non-hobby people that hear I built scale models have no clue what it means, and even some that do don’t understand the “depth” of what I do until I show them some completed models and my work bench. From my experience though anyone who is even remotely involved in building models does not dismiss it as playing with toys, but then I’ve gotten pretty good at sizing people up before I share my hobby, I never did at work for instance, no one there seamed to be a modeler. I’m just not sure I see a name change making much difference, at least in the U.S.

    Now the journal, for me a change would make a difference, I’m indifferent about print or digital, if digital would save a lot of money to use on other things I’d be alright with it. But content, that would make a difference for me, there are things that I find more interesting than others in the journal.

    More focus on new products, and by new I mean anything that’s come out within the last 1-2 years, and coming releases. I’m with Noel, I don’t need to have breaking news on products. But I do really find it really useful if the news is in one place as long as it’s still in production. If the journal was just IPMS news/business and product news I would be happy, but that’s just me I’m sure. That said the journal, in any form will never be a reason for me to quit IPMS.

    The biggest issue I see is competition with other publication's that pay people for their content, and can attract a steady stream of content they can pick and choose from. But then if the only thing someone got for belonging to IPMS is the journal, it would be $7.50 a copy, not $18-20+ a copy, and I don’t find those worth that most of the time.

     

  3. 4 hours ago, ghodges said:

    ……. This also speaks to the subject broached several pages back... how do we grow IPMSUSA and who do we target? Unlike some ex-Eboard members who proposed trying to throw IPMS open to ALL modelers in some vain attempt to appear "inclusive", I think we should be targeting the SERIOUS PLASTIC modelers who are most like us and who would be much more likely to join.

    Would that put a limit on our growth? Not really.... I think it would make us be more realistic in our estimates of growth. In the past we've tended to look at the numbers of kits sold and the obvious evidence of the great number of builders out there and see that vast sea of plastic modelers as the group to appeal to; and then wonder why we can't interest them. It's because only a small sliver of them are actually like US. But if even a tenth of that sliver could be enticed into becoming IPMS members, it would probably triple our current numbers.

    I'm not sure if THAT would be good or bad..... but IF we're looking to "grow" IPMSUSA let's first be realistic about who we have the best shot at adding to our numbers. THEN we can start discussing WHAT we think might make IPMS more relevant and interesting to them and any changes needed going forward.

    Gil  :cool:

    Gil hit this nail on the head, hasn’t IPMS always targeted a more “serious” modeler as Gil put it? I always saw IPMS as a craftsmanship based society, promoting that over other aspects, so yeah, it’s not for everyone, not because it excludes anyone on purpose, on the contrary, it welcomes everyone who wants to embrace that philosophy.

    We have never been a huge group, we are larger now then ever, San Marcos had just over 3100 models in the contest, entered by 534 people (about 4 models per person) Omaha the year before had just over 2700 entered by 475 people (about 4.5 models per person), I would bet chapter level contests/shows have about the same percentage, of course it doesn’t average out like that, some bring 1 and some bring 20. The point being that the modelers who enter contests more than not probably lean towards Gil’s “serious” definition, just not a huge group. And our over all member number shows that too in my opinion. I don’t see any of this as a problem.

    There is overlap in reasons people join IPMS and chapter/clubs as pointed out, builders, collectors, support for IPMS/club operations, socialization, all great reasons and I don’t see a problem with any of that. And I still haven’t seen any evidence that the national convention and/or contest, changing anything about it or not, is going to grow or even save IPMS. I agree that targeting Gil’s “serious” modelers is a better idea than trying to appeal to everyone for everything. Find out what appeals to that group, what would get them to join, is it building education, technical details, collaboration, collecting, socialization, whatever it is, but gear it to that group. And as far as I’m concerned there are lots of modelers that are interested in IPMS’s philosophy of modeling, it’s finding what will get them to join and pay the $30 bucks a year for it that needs figured out.

     

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  4. 4 hours ago, MikeMoore said:

    Who knows? 

    I joined IPMS because there was a local chapter who welcomed me when I had just moved to Chattanooga and was newly back into the hobby.  For me, the single biggest reason I joined was the sense of community.  I don't know that I ever expected anything more from IPMS.  Here's what I see IPMS offers me:

    • The structure that supports local chapters.
    • The organization that makes affordable (read free) insurance coverage to model shows.
    • The structure and financing that makes the National Convention possible.

    For me, that's enough.  What's it take to keep you interested?  

    I agree with all this 100%!!!

  5. 12 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    …..So I don't buy that vendors would be financially affected in any way should members have first hour access. At Telford it works well and have not heard of any traders complaining. The only difference as far as I see is your Nats has a separate vendor room whereas Telford's traders are interspersed throughout the halls along with all the other exhibitors.….

    I agree, if venders were not making a good percentage I doubt they would be showing up in the first place. But from others posts here I think there are other areas that need attention first, just my thoughts,

    *Someone registered adding a bunch of others as “family” for starters, basically getting a group in cheaper is a problem.

    *A system of access control that doesn’t have to be reinvented every year by the hosting chapter(s) that allows for a relatively easy way to distinguish members from non-members. And for my two cents any member who “forgets” their membership card it’s on them, too bad.

    *Daily entry prices that highly favor members and make becoming a member much more attractive.

    5 hours ago, Ron Bell said:

    The old "why join IPMS" question. The question "what's in it for me" is more prevalent now than ever. Just joining a group of people that share your interest and being a part of a larger organization no longer attracts the current generations. Witness the decline in membership in most if not all fraternal organizations such as the Eagles, Odd Fellows and their like. People no longer need an organization to be linked up with others of like mind, they have the internet for that.

    I agree with this 100% unfortunately, but in my view the internet is just not the same thing.

    3 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    So it is just a generational thing and nothing can be done? 

    Yes and maybe no. All most all the calls for change have been about the national convention, but that has never been a membership generator, it seems that as many that join to go each year quit, and it happens year after year. The chapters are were a real difference could be made in my opinion, I belong to a chapter with around 110-120 members, 10% of them might be IPMS members (less then 25), if every chapter doubled their IPMS members we could see total membership go up by thousands, if it went to 50% I bet our current membership would almost double.

    Of course HOW is the question, HOW do we get people to see value in paying a LOUSY $30 bucks a YEAR to be part of a group of people who like what they like. I mean honestly, I’ve spent far more on ONE meal that it turned out I didn’t care for. I do believe there are things to try, but it will take more involvement from national.

    • Like 1
  6. On 2/6/2024 at 5:09 PM, BWScholten said:

    How many general admissions do we get in the first hour?  That is probably one statistic we can't get.

    I agree this information should be tracked, but not just the first hour. How many day passes are sold each day? How many overall? How many are members? How many are nonmembers? I realize this takes some work but would be very helpful for the board to form strategies moving forward, if that is what is wanted.

    On 2/7/2024 at 7:12 AM, ghodges said:

    I advise applying Ron Bell's idea of the KISS principle.... it's easier to charge non-members more than to try to control where and when they go somewhere once they arrive!  Gil :cool:

    I can see Gil’s logic about controlling access, and completely agree about entry charges. I am just going to say it, I was surprised when I went to my first couple of conventions and you could go without registering for the convention, AND you didn’t have to be a member.

    No other organizations (professional or volunteer) that I had or have been involved with ran their conventions that way, you HAD to register for the convention regardless of how much of it you attended, AND be a member of the organization. 

    Before I get flogged… I understand that is probably a hill too far, but the charges for attending could be structured to passively encourage and make it a much better deal to become a member and register. I would start with day passes, they are too low IMO, I haven’t seen what Madison’s are yet but IMO they should be higher for nonmembers than members, and should be higher period. For members I would say a day pass would be a little more then half of what registration costs, so going for two days makes registration a better deal, for nonmembers I would say more than that.

    I am NOT talking about a sudden change, but over 2-3 years gradually increase these prices, people can acclimate to a slow rise in temperature better than a sudden one. I’m NOT claiming to know better then those who have been involved in putting on a national convention, I have been involved planning and running chapter contests at two different chapters, and larger conventions (1000+people) in my career, so just sharing my experiences from those.

    • Like 2
  7. 6 hours ago, ghodges said:

    ….How do you put limits on the vendors or the contest? To a degree, the vendors already DO have a limit; that being the capacity of whatever facility is being used. But do we cap it JUST to be able to afford and find slightly smaller facilities? You could also put limits on the contest simply by charging a fee per model after the first 1 or 2..... but do we want to do that?   Gil :cool:….

    I agree, I don’t think limits on vendors or entries is the answer, or on displaying models, it’s what we are about. But could there be other ways, I look at the cost to go to our convention and I’m always amazed, at how low it is all travel/hotel costs aside, at usually right around $50 bucks to register for a four day convention is dirt cheap in my opinion. Look at other hobby conventions, NMRA for instance is $195 for members (companion/spouse $100) and includes an early entry to some events. These are the questions I have;

    Are the costs to vendors comparable to other like events, table costs, etc? Are table costs the only fee convention organizers for like events charge vendors?
     

    The banquet is usually mandatory to get a better price on the facilities, so why is it voluntary for registration? If the current number of banquet tickets sold brings the facilities rate down what would double that do? If anything? 
     

    Access, I understand the reasons to let non-member attend, try to make them members, but what does a member get for registering that say day pass attendees don’t get? Besides entering the contest, judging and the ability to go to the banquet why register? Or for that matter join IPMS?

     

     

     

    • Like 3
  8. Yeah, I would love high speed trains in the U.S., but I think Gil’s time estimates on ever seeing it are low, I would go with 20-30 years easy and that’s not country wide. The issue with travel time/travel costs has been identified as the main thing keeping people from attending for years now, but attendance at the convention has been growing and that is bringing a different issue that we have been barely skirting around to the forefront, the size of the facilities/hotels where they are held. 
     

    We have known for years that in the scope of events our space/area needs are very heavy compared to registration numbers, in other words we don’t have the “weight” in registered attendees to negotiate more, guest rooms, convention space, whatever. We are growing, and are or have out grown our current mode of operation facilities wise, regardless of geographic location, and the only answers are going to cost more, this in my opinion is the most urgent issue to work on, just look at the hoops the Madison crew is needing to jump through to put theirs on, and they are not the first.

    • Like 1
  9. 2 hours ago, scottj said:

    I'm in my mid 60s but am unlikely to make it through my stash in this lifetime.  

    Welcome, you’re in good company, if I quit buying kits right now (at 64) I MIGHT have a chance, but that’s not going to happen!!

  10. On 1/27/2024 at 9:24 AM, ghodges said:

    Trying to make one more like the other isn't the answer going forward. Instead, EACH show would need to poll attendees to see what changes THEY desire and would  support going forward.

    Gil :cool:
     

    I agree, but I’m leery of surveys/polls, they all depend on to many variables. Who you ask, what is asked, how the questions are worded, how the results are presented and interpreted. There were almost 1000 registered attendees at San Marcos, just over 500 of them entered the contest, maybe the same whet to the banquet, if all 1000 were asked if they like/don’t like those aspects of the convention is that really going to give an accurate representation? 
     

    The survey from SM showed for the contest the answers between neutral/like/really like were overwhelming. To ME that is a clear answer to the question, besides tweaks and improvements to the existing format leave it alone, but it seems others see something different. I think other rubrics give a better sense of popularity, like attendance/participation and number of entries.

     

    IMG_1093.jpeg

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  11. 17 hours ago, noelsmith said:

    Michael's mention that anyone in the UK can drive to Telford within a day, true, but completely overlooks the fact that many of our visitors travel from all over Europe to visit the show.

    True, I thought about the impact of attendees from Europe. It would be interesting to see the impact in numbers of attendees from outside the U.K. 
     

    Just for fun…..

     

    IMG_1087.jpeg

    • Haha 1
    • Confused 1
  12. 2 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    What about if we had a convention in California then?  If it was such a big issue then we would see double the attendance in Virginia than we had in Texas.  The other thing that you can look at is per capita members.  They have as many members as us with a tenth the population. 

    That would be the “answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything “ and it’s not 42. Historically west coast conventions have always seen lower attendance than east coast, and Midwest has fallen in between. 80% of the population of the U.S. live east of the middle of the country, I would expect to see more attendance in Virginia, but not close to double, Texas was great, but Virginia is closer to far more people. 
     

    The fact that conventions in higher density areas have more attendance makes sense, a LOT more people can get there conveniently and in less time, it’s a matter of opportunity. The chapters are a microcosm of the society as a whole, there are 5 million people in the Phoenix metro area, the Phoenix Chapter has a little over 100 members, other larger metro areas (Seattle) have about the same, I don’t know about east coast chapter numbers maybe someone else can chime in.
     

    My first convention was Seattle in ‘92, to me it was fantastic, huge compared to any model event I had ever seen. Other people were complaining about how small it was, I was a little put out about that honestly, but after 20 of them now, some on the east coast, it was, comparatively. But attendance has been trending up ever since, west coast too.

    • Haha 1
  13. 4 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    So telford gets about 10,000 over the weekend not over the week.  I was looking at more of memberships as a per capita. Not the show.  But it would be interesting to overlay the uk over Madison and see how many attendees attend.  

    I think it would be a great help to track the numbers from the Nat’s for other than registration. It would really help to understand members vs. non-member participation. This was from the final report for San Marcos;

    There were 958 registered IPMS members, thats 19% of our 5000 members. Unfortunately walk in day passes are not included, I believe those far outnumber registered members, and a good amount are IPMS members who don’t want to register for the convention, but the numbers have never been published so we don’t know.

    IPMS/UK has just over 4000 members, I don’t know Cameron, I read the article you linked, and I’ve looked at lots of photos and videos of the event, I’m just not seeing that kind of crowds, I too would find it interesting and helpful to see harder data on the numbers then “about 10,000 people are expected” news reports, that goes for the IPMS/USA convention too. 
     

    Regardless of all that, in my opinion the convention is a success already, a bigger success would be getting more existing members to attend, but I think that means overcoming the travel and cost of issues involved, and in that regard I’m not optimistic.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  14. 12 hours ago, ghodges said:

    Yes, you are reading me correctly...

    I am NOT in favor of growth JUST for the sake of growth....

    I am NOT in favor of courting paper model builders, wooden model builders, RC builders; over trying to attract PLASTIC model builders. Each of the others have their own societies and clubs. Do WE have the right to go to them and expect THEM to change to accept us? No.... and thus if they want to join IPMS, they have to be willing to accept IPMS as a PLASTIC model group that either limits or excludes their participation at some levels (like the Nats contest, NOT at LOCAL club meetings).

    I AM in favor of catering FIRST to the current membership, who PAID US to DO SO. Go figure! That is what I meant by tempering any future changes to be sure we're not throwing away what works or destroying who we are; which is PLASTIC model builders. And as a paying member, I expect our Eboard to take care of MY needs ahead of "potential" members who may or may not join. RETAINING current members is a higher priority than "growing".

    I AM in favor of growth, but in two specific ways, and I don't care what the eventual size ends up at:

    1) Look at what we can do to KEEP members from dropping/lapsing their membership and get past members who didn't renew to look at us once more and join again. In other words, look at what changes and perks we can offer to "IPMS" members, current and past. Grow IPMSUSA by first keeping more of our members for longer time periods.

    2) Target the vast majority of PLASTIC model builders everywhere who never joined IPMS and may not even know about us. We made need to make some changes for them and offer more "bang for the buck" to do so, but at least they're a group with a like interest, as opposed to train hobbyists or your quilters (and I doubt you'll find crocheters welcome to display at the quilting show, by the way!)

    Doing both of the above has the potential to substantially grow IPMSUSA from its steady 4000+ membership to probably 5-6000 or more, and is much more realistic because it targets people familiar with us as well as those with the EXACT same interest.

    Gil :cool:

    I agree with this.

    • Haha 1
  15. 10 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    What defines a successful show.

    If our only goal is to make money then we are successful.  When you start to compare to other countries you can get a picture of how successful we are.  Compare to Telford and they have much more success.  And their countries population is much less.  

    Another interesting comparison is the growth.  We have nearly the same amount of members as we had a decade ago.  

    Honestly, I don’t believe the goal is to make money, if anything it’s to break even, any profits are a bonus split between national and the chapter(s) hosts, luckily it seems we rarely lose money. So you could call that aspect a success.

    I'm sure IPMS/UK’s convention is great, in my opinion any model event is great. My question is what makes you think Telford has “much more success”? Or other countries? Is it the number of models there, the number of people attending? I’m not seeing that other large scale model events have more success than us in those areas. It’s not fair in my opinion to compare Telford and our convention as to the size of the country, you can drive to Telford from anywhere in the UK in less than a day. The problem is defining success, what makes it successful can be different from person to person. 

    I agree, the fact the membership stays about the same has been a question for a long time. I would really like to see the actual number of that turnover every year, people leave and just as many people join, every year. I agree that retention is a good goal, what would be the increase in membership if they stayed members.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  16. 7 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    That is what I meant

    Good, then you understand that the NCC always reported (answered to?) the president and e-board, the chief judge could be replaced by them if they chose, and the chief judge could replace head judges if they chose too. Past e-boards “chose” to give the NCC autonomy to run and conduct the national contest, that also means the last e-board, as well as the current one, received the rules, and approved them. 
     

    As for whether an event is successful or not, where is the data to show the national convention is not successful? What are the benchmarks? If it makes money? How many people attend? In our case how many models are displayed? Keep in mind that the IPMS National convention was started as a gathering of members for members, as are most organizations annual conventions, its main purpose is that, not to be a non-member event, it has changed over the years to “open” it more and more to non-members and the public. The contest is still members only, and it has concisely gained popularity based on the number of entrants and entries. So I am at a loss as to what would be considered more successful?

  17. Having the authority doesn’t automatically translate into using the authority, as was pointed out, past e-boards had more authority then they chose to exercise. Even if it is, there are many options for using it that don’t involve force. This board and future ones have the same choices, I have never found heavy handed leadership to work very well, and never found it motivated people.
     

    What was the line from Inidiana Jones when the guy grabbed the shiny  babble covered goblet, “ he chose poorly….”

    • Like 1
  18. 5 hours ago, WasatchModeler said:

    Bringing in people that have judged at us ipms nationals for a decade brings in an attitude of doing things the old way.  In corporate speak we talk about diversity of thought.  We hire an outsider or consultant to get new ideas.  Bringing in fresh blood allows for a way to have them ask "why do we do it this way? What if we... instead we laught at new ideas saying that it is not possible even though other organizations are very proficient at it with similar numbers.  

    I was laughed at in my first nationals at the aircraft judges meeting.  I think it was for feedback sheets or how you judge weathering.  It was at Las Vegas.  

    Cameron, I have hired a good number of consultants and consulting firms over the years, and I always required all of them to show years of experience in the field/subject I wanted evaluated and/or studied, consultants are usually people with years of experience in their field and transition to consulting, firms are the same but may have a spread of experience. The same is true when it comes to us, the head judges for Madison will not be bring “new” or “old” ideas to the contest, they will be following the rules that were just posted for Madison. As Gil has pointed out, due to some of the head judges starting “cold” and really last minute by planning and organization standards, experience is important, and honestly I believe it always is. 
     

    Presenting ideas is a tricky deal, first my advice would be before you present at an open meeting, shop your idea(s) around, and not just with your immediate group of modelers, I’ve fallen into the same situation where I thought I had a good idea and presented it without thoroughly researching if it had a history of working or not already. Experience can be a double edged sword, it gives you a deep history of past and present, what has worked and what has been tried and didn’t work, what is feasible and what isn’t, and you can come across a little impatient and jaded when “new” ideas that you have heard before come up. It’s unfortunate you were laughed at, but hopefully you understand that we are not in an environment where there is as strict control, as there would probably be in a paid employees environment, over interactions between people. In my case I took it as a learning experience, and found that prior preparation and presentation techniques made a huge difference.

    • Thanks 1
  19. 50 minutes ago, Scalemodeldoc said:

    Do you have a copy of the old constitution / bylaws that delineated the organization and reporting of the NCC and its components in the way you describe?

    I have not found a copy of the last constitution, I do have working docs from my time with the constitution committee. This is the section you would be talking about;

    ARTICLE VII. DUTIES OF OTHER APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND COMMITTEES

    A.  Titled Positions

    1. By directive of the President and with approval of the Executive Board, any positions found necessary to the functioning, control, and maintenance of IPMS/USA may be created. 
    2. These positions will be under the direct control of the President or other officer designated by him for the time required.

    B.  Committees

    1. Committees established for specific tasks as required may be created for a set period of time by the President and the Executive Board.

    I agree completely with Ron’s (past president) explanation above.

    • Like 2
  20. 1 hour ago, WasatchModeler said:

    The ncc does work for the elected e board.  They should have someone to answer to.  

    Nobody “works” for anybody in this organization! We are all volunteers, and as such don’t “answer” as such, to anyone. In any professional or volunteer organization I’ve been involved with committees are organized this way:

    * A chairman, for the NCC that is the chief judge. The chief judge (chairman) has ALWAYS been approved and appointed by the president and e-board, and reports back to them on committee operations. It has ALWAYS been that they can be dismissed and replaced at the presidents/e-boards discretion.

    * The committee members, for the NCC those are the head category judges. They report to the chief judge (chairman). The chief judge (chairman) appoints them and can dismiss and replace them.

    * The NCC develops the rules and operating parameters for the contest and is responsible for all contest operations. The rules are updated yearly and GIVEN TO THE E-BOARD FOR APPROVAL, the e-board then can approve or not, ask questions, ask for changes, etc. Sure, they might get pushback and resistance, they had the ability to do the same.

    That is how the constitution was written, BEFORE the resent changes. No committee I've ever been involved with had the entire committee reporting to the entity that organized it (e-board), it was always the chairman that was the go between. I don’t know how past boards viewed their authority, or used it, but it was there. 

    • Thanks 1
  21. 3 hours ago, Chris Bucholtz said:

    The problem is, once you've had two or three GSB contests and the same people win gold, then some folks will AGAIN think there's some "insiders' club" or something.

    At a certain level, some folks have a sportsmanship problem that leads to their perception problem. I've gone to 24 Nationals and I've won four times (statistically, less than the average 24-time attendee) and it's not because there's a cabal or because I'm not a good modeler (I hope!). It's because that's the way it goes. If you can't accept that, or if your personal identity is defined by where your model finishes, you're going to have a rough time in contests (or in watching team sports, or following politics or anything where there's winners and non-winners). 

    I agree with Chris here, I don't think that competition between modelers is really as much of a problem as it’s made out, competition is hardwired in humans, and definitely in the U.S., sure, some people genuinely don’t like it and/or don’t care, but I believe they are the exception not the rule. I think what people don’t like is the thought that they didn’t win, and look at it as losing, and when someone looks at it like that they look at everything like it’s cutthroat, including driving. 

    I fully support expanding the display and SIG display aspect of the convention and making it a prominent part of it. And would not object to adding a separate G,S,B type of show separately from the contest. 

    I hear a LOT about how our contest should be run and awarded like IPMS/UK’s Telford, and I’m SURE it is a great contest with fantastic models and modelers. The only difference I’m seeing is that they score the models numerically for award placements, there are still only three awards in each category, one G,S,B per category, and I don’t know if all contestants get their scores and can compare where they fell on the scale. Is this that much different than what we do?

    Call it 1,2,3 or G,S,B, if someone thinks they should have gotten something they didn’t their not going to like it, it’s how someone accepts and deals with it that will make the difference, as it is with everything in life, in my opinion.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  22. 56 minutes ago, ghodges said:

    ….ANYONE can be a "good old boy" by stepping up to serve or to judge, making themselves less of an outsider and increasing their chances of being a contest winner….

    Gil :cool:

    I believe Gil is right, it’s really ironic that those that feel they are on the outside of a perceived group will themselves become the “good old boys” of that group if/when they replace the existing people that are perceived to make up that group.

    • Like 3
    • Haha 1
  23. 2 hours ago, RainingOil said:

    Well, agitator seems to be, by your implication, a dismissive term in which you’re lumping everyone not for maintaining the status quo. This club has a giant problem with being a good ol boys club, and that is what people want to change. 

    OK… I don’t see good ol’ boys, by your implication, as any less dismissive. As I said, you can, as a member, come here and discuss issues that effect the society, and be an agitator, my question is can you be more? Can you put ideas forward that will appeal to ALL members, if the median age is 62ish, like it or not, you will need to get historic members (as Eric kindly put it) on board with any changes. Speaking from experience it is hard to change a paradigm, and is usually a slow process, but can be done, the saying “you will catch more flies with sugar then salt” is still true even if you don’t like it.
     

    I appreciate you coming here, and encourage it to discuss member issues, but I disagree there is a giant problem with status quo, please show me some kind of hard data to support it. It doesn’t mean you can’t change mine and or other peoples thinking/minds, it’s just going to take more finesse then force. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  24. 17 minutes ago, Scalemodeldoc said:

    ……I do tire of the excuses “well that is a valid point, but unless it is brought up at the annual in person NCC meeting at 10:15am with this form in triplicate…”. Smacks of gate keeping……

    For the record, I did not say “unless it is brought up at the annual in person meeting”, the person(s) with the concern and photo were at the convention, and could have easily attended the meeting and voiced their concern, there were other avenues as well that did not require access through any gates. They decided on a much more drama producing and shaming “outing” on social media. Smacks of an agenda….

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
×
×
  • Create New...